Official Languages Committee on May 6th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Today is Tuesday, May 6, 2014. Welcome to the 22nd meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108, we are here to carry out a study on the economic situation of Canada's minority linguistic communities.

We have three groups of witnesses today. We will first hear from Mr. Robillard and Mr. Lévesque, who represent the Réseau pour le développement de l'alphabétisme et des compétences.

We also have Mr. Morrow and Madam Dennison from Canadian Youth for French, and, appearing as an individual, Dr. Galbraith, professor of economics at McGill University.

Welcome, everyone. We'll begin with Monsieur Robillard.

[Michel Robillard, Vice-President, Réseau pour le développement de l'alphabétisme et des compétences]

Mr. Chair, members of the committee, I am Michel Robillard, Vice-President of the Réseau pour le développement de l'alphabétisme et des compétences, RESDAC. I am accompanied by Normand Lévesque, the organization's director general.

Thank you for this invitation to appear before the Standing Committee on Official Languages to express our views as part of your study of the economic situation of Canada's minority linguistic communities.

For more than 20 years, RESDAC has been mobilizing its strategic partners around the social project of improving literacy and skill levels among francophone adults in Canada, who would in turn fully engage in their communities' civic, economic, social and cultural life, and thus contribute to their growth and development.

As Angel Gurria, Secretary-General of the OECD, said, skills have become the global currency of the 21st century. According to the OECD, skills transform lives and drive economies. To that end, it is crucial that the whole population of a given country, as well as its workforce, possess skills for life.

The OECD goes on, stating that the way we live and work has changed profoundly, and so has the set of skills we need to participate fully in and benefit from our hyper-connected societies and increasingly knowledge-based economies.

What about Canada? What about skills development among francophone adults, supporting employment and supporting the growth of our communities across the country?

Ten years ago, Canada's situation in terms of essential skills was clearly problematic. Results from the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, PIAAC, published in October 2013, are just as clear in demonstrating that the problem is still unresolved. Are we on the wrong track?

Canada's performance is less than stellar, leaving the country in a difficult situation. Canada ranks at the OECD average in literacy. However, it has a higher proportion of its population at the highest but also at the lowest levels in literacy. Canada ranks below the OECD average in numeracy, and a higher proportion of Canadians are at the lowest levels in this area. Canada is rated above the OECD average in problem solving in technology-rich environments. However, 17% of Canadians did not complete the evaluation because 11% of them did not have the basic computer skills and 6% of them opted out of the computer-based assessment.

Canada has a larger proportion of adults at the lowest proficiency levels in all three targeted domains, compared with the OECD average.

An important and disturbing fact to note is that official language minority populations tend not to perform as well as official language majority populations—except for anglophones in Quebec—but differences vary across provinces.

If skills have become the global currency of the 21st century, our bank is in debt. Our line of credit is seriously threatened by rating agencies, is it not?

The time has come for innovative and dynamic responses. The implementation of 21st century skills for the 21st century will be an intricate challenge, requiring that we act together with all our partners. There is danger in waiting. New requirements are constantly emerging in terms of training, employment and economic development. Now, more than ever, we need to devise innovative and bold policies.

While similar to those faced by the majority of Canadian adults, issues of skills development among official language minority communities are amplified by other types of obstacles. Results of the 2003 survey and those of the PIAAC demonstrate it quite clearly. Literacy skills establish a foundation for learning all other skills. They also form the basis of training services provided to adult learners, for them to learn, work and contribute to their communities' economic development. In the Canadian context, it is not sufficient to apply an all-encompassing approach in terms of policies and programs designed to increase literacy levels and skills development among francophone adults.

Progress made in terms of innovation, research, expertise development, and community mobilization and involvement is currently jeopardized by the absence of a well-defined vision and adequate funding for organizations and institutions devoted to skills development. We must promptly act together with all our partners.

The presence of networks such as RESDAC across the country, as well as of key players from provincial and territorial governments, economic agencies and training centres is a guarantee of success. It is up to the federal government to recognize this and to provide concrete support to these best practices.

We need long-term support through significant funding. The implementation of the Roadmap for Canada's Official Languages 2013-2018 is lagging behind in the area of skills development and social partnerships. The federal government's commitment dates back to March 2013 and has yet to materialize. We have no information regarding the implementation of this focus area, and none of the actors within the skills sector have had access to this funding. The lack of funding jeopardizes the progress made in recent years, and prevents economic and government stakeholders from working with quality community partners.

The government must increase policies and measures that allow the Canadian population to develop skills on an ongoing basis. It must also ensure that less qualified individuals—who are not likely to engage in training and who may benefit less from training provided by employers and established services—can escape the vicious circle of low skills and low income.

The government must transform the wealth of data on skills and their impact on Canada, its population and its development, into tangible opportunities to design and implement policies, programs and funding frameworks that meet the needs of OLMCs in terms of employment, economic development and skills development.

Last, we must improve our understanding of the labour market and the economy within OLMCs, as well as issues, challenges and best practices related to skills development by actively supporting research and innovative projects.

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for your interest.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Robillard.

Now we have Mr. Morrow, of Canadian Youth for French.

[Justin Morrow, President of the Board, Canadian Youth for French]

Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the invitation to appear before you to discuss the economic situation of minority linguistic communities.

As consumers, employees and employers in those communities, we are very pleased to be able to share our views with you.

Virtually present with me today is Christie Dennison, who is the vice-president of CYF's board of directors, who's in New Brunswick, who understands the reality of young English Canadians, and who has also worked for an economic development agency for the past number of years. We'll probably be calling on her a little bit more in the question and answer period.

Before I begin, I would like to update you on the developments that have taken place at CYF over the past year.

We have still not received a confirmation of our funding for this year, but it was suggested that we apply for a programming grant. We intend to benefit from that status to move the organization forward with our stakeholders.

Four areas of our strategic direction have changed since the last time we appeared.

First, we wish to increase our administrative capacity.

Second, we want to increase our membership. Any individual or organization that commits to advancing the organization's mission and vision can become our member. That includes employees and employers.

Third, we want to build a bridge between our members and francophone communities. We have to continue the work we have done with Manitoba communities last year and refine our provincial mandate.

Fourth, we want to continue developing the Discover Zone, which, as you know, is our tool for establishing a connection between anglophones and the francophone economy.

There are two areas that I'd like to draw your attention to. One is our vision. Over the past year, we were able to gain a greater understanding of the environment in which we're working, and we have come to realize that there's a huge gap between our government's investments in official languages and the economy.

We want to bridge that gap, and that's why we decided to change our vision this year. Our vision is that of a Canada where the majority of the population speaks both official languages and sees that as a competitive advantage that will make our country a leader in the global economy.

Note the link to the economy there. This will be expanded on a little bit later in the presentation.

The second point that I want to draw your attention to is with regard to the Discover Zone. Over the past year, we were also able to gain a better understanding of this reality. Unfortunately, the reality is that it's going to cost us quite a bit more to get it off the ground than we'll be able to receive through grants. We've therefore put the Discover Zone on hold for the time being while we explore our options to figure out how we're going to generate the seed money required to do so.

It should also be noted that, since day one, Canadian Youth for French was developed around a business model that would allow it to one day be self-sufficient from government funding. Our goal is still, and always will be, to be self-sufficient of public funds.

Now, we want to help you with your recommendations on how the Government of Canada can support official language minority communities, so as to build sustainable and growing economies.

Before getting into the recommendations, I'd like to refresh your memory about the first time I was here before you, back in March 2012. At that time, I tried to get you to think outside the box a bit and to guide you toward directing the roadmap investments toward the creation of a bilingual space, a space that values the cultural differences while respecting the integrity and history of both languages, in order to create the Canadian ideal. One day in my lifetime, Canadian Youth for French will realize its vision of an officially bilingual majority, but we won't be able to get there until we start consciously preparing for it.

That is why our first recommendation is to include in your study the participation of official languages majority communities.

I think you should examine Canada's economic situation, so that your recommendations on how the Government of Canada can support those communities would help build a sustainable and growing Canadian economy based on official languages. Please note that this includes English and French, as well as minority and majority communities.

This doesn't take anything away from minority communities in our economy. We need that strong economy to be able to provide for our demographic, our membership.

Quebec has some companies that need employees from English Canada to be able to expand outside the province. There are also companies in the rest of the country that want to use a more bilingual workforce in order to expand into non-anglophone markets.

Maybe that's what you're practising with this study. That's why I suggest that you ensure the participation of official language minority communities. But at the end of the day, you're always going to go back—and everything we do goes back—to what the purpose of the study will be, which separates Canada's economy into two, the anglophone and the francophone, while we should be concentrating on one entire unit of the Canadian economy, one solid thing.

So, by working together, we will make the most of the competitive advantage stemming from our two official languages in order to build a sustainable and growing Canadian economy.

Our second recommendation would be for you to take a long look at the funding programs that are currently delivered through the Department of Canadian Heritage in order to see if the terminology that is used reflects today's reality.

In the Official Languages report of 1994-95, in addition to education, investments were made in two areas: support of official language community organizations and promotion of dialogue. In 2011-12, investments were made in the development of official language communities and the enhancement of official languages, in which we can find the promotion of linguistic duality.

To summarize, the terminology surrounding our investments in official languages over the past 20 years hasn't really changed all that much, which would imply that the environment hasn't really changed all that much either. But I would argue that we've come a long way since the last referendum in Quebec and that our investments since that time have done what they were supposed to do.

I couldn't find any statistics from today, but I'll give you an example from 2006, which will give you a good overview of what I'm talking about. Between 2003 and 2006, the Commissioner of Official Languages reported that the percentage of Canadians in favour of bilingualism for all of Canada went from 56% to 72%, an increase of 16% over three years in the appreciation for official languages. Moreover, in 2006 more than 80% of Canadians between the ages of 18 and 34 were in favour of bilingualism for all of Canada. This was in 2006, and with the investments made over the past eight years, I can only imagine that this number has continued to increase a little more.

When we talk about the promotion of linguistic duality, which is what we're investing in and what the programming says we're investing in, is our goal to get this number for those who support official languages to 100%? That's what I'm looking at there. That's kind of what I'm seeing. At the same time, our informal research has shown us that 5% to 10% of all high school graduates graduate from an immersion program, yet if we look at that 5% to 10% three to five years later, only 5% of that 5% is continuing to use their second official language on a regular basis.

Therefore, by investing $112 million a year in second language learning, only 2.5% of high school graduates really benefit from their bilingual capacity, so again, why are we investing in second language learning? Is it to promote linguistic duality or to create more bilingual employees that will boost Canada's economy? The verbiage should reflect this reasoning.

To go back, I have two recommendations. One is to ensure the participation of the majority communities in this study. The second is to conduct a review of funding programs delivered through the Department of Canadian Heritage in order to make sure that the terminology used reflects today's reality and gives thousands of young English Canadians across the country an opportunity to contribute to and support the building of sustainable francophone minority economies.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much.

The next speaker will be Dr. Galbraith from McGill University.

[Dr. John Galbraith, Professor of Economics, McGill University, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

I am not representing any group. I was asked to address the committee, I guess to provide some general economic perspective. I'm the chair of the economics department at McGill. I guess, particularly having heard the previous speakers, I'll begin with a general overview of I think some things we should keep in mind in looking at the kinds of programs that I imagine your committee is thinking of and perhaps try to avoid losing sight of the forest for the trees.

You, I presume, are interested in general in the economic position of all minorities in Canada, linguistic minorities in particular, and more generally in things that will encourage economic growth and development in Canada. Economic growth depends, of course, on investment, and that means human capital investment, as I think both the previous speakers have touched upon, and also investment in physical capital.

The question is, what role can the Canadian government be playing in ensuring that appropriate investments take place among minority linguistic communities and in general among those who can contribute to economic growth? By far the most important of these, of course—and this is where I want to suggest that we not lose sight of the forest for the trees—by far the most important role, I think, that the government can play in this, which the Canadian government has traditionally done very well, is simply to protect the rights of minorities and the conditions for investment, the creation of new businesses, and, in general, the installation of physical capital, conditions that encourage people to invest and to make communities grow, whether by linguistic minorities or not.

As I say, if we look around the world at the way things generally work, the Canadian government has an excellent record of doing this. We don't want to be complacent about that, of course, but at the same time I think we should keep in mind that by far the most important thing the Canadian government has done in this area is simply to create those general conditions and maintain them, and to also maintain a climate in which people know that they can count upon these things.

There have, of course, been some lapses. There have been situations in which minorities have felt that they lack the certainty about the future or the stability necessary to make investments.

In particular, in Quebec there have been periods of substantial uncertainty, which have no doubt impeded investment here. It's a commonplace here in Quebec, not only among the English or other linguistic minority groups, but among francophones, that the situation of uncertainty that has existed, certainly in the past and less so now, I hope, has been an impediment to investment.

The record of the government in providing these conditions is of course not perfect—we live in a difficult world—but it has been very good, and I think we need primarily to keep our eye on those successes and try to maintain them.

If we look beyond that at barriers that may arise to investments, both in education and in physical capital, and also at the question of what specifically—if anything—the government might think of doing in the way of programs to address these things, I think that again we have to take an overview and ask what problems exist that can't be solved through the normal mechanisms for individuals making investments. What are the barriers that sometimes arise, such as barriers in access to capital, that the government may help people in overcoming?

Now, there are some circumstances, certainly, in which access to capital markets is a problem. One frequently hears, for example, of cases in which women in developing countries have very limited access to capital markets and where programs to provide capital have made a substantial difference.

There's little indication I can see that Canada is in this position. On the whole in this country we don't experience the overt discrimination against minorities that exists in some places, certainly not at an institutional level, and certainly not involving the official languages of the country. I think it's unlikely that English or French minorities in this country experience restricted access to traditional capital markets through banks or other forms of financing for business.

I think that if we are going to be considering programs to address problems in the general pattern of access to the requirements for investing, we need to look carefully at what is wrong and needs to be fixed and consider whether existing programs are still doing their jobs. We need to look at these things in the context of some sensible policy design for the problems that are being solved.

I think the general principle that should underlie all attempts to address the economic position of minorities is access to these forms of investment in education and human capital and physical capital that allow people to improve their economic situation. I think we need to evaluate programs very carefully, whether or not they've been existing for a long time, to ask whether they're helping us to achieve that and whether they're overcoming some genuine barrier.

That's all I'll say for now. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Professor Galbraith.

Now we'll have about an hour of questions and comments, beginning with Monsieur Godin.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to welcome our guests, including Ms. Dennison, who is participating by videoconference from Fredericton, New Brunswick, which is my province. I also want to thank Mr. Galbraith, who is a professor at McGill University.

I will begin with Mr. Robillard, from the RESDAC, the Réseau pour le développement de l'alphabétisme et des compétences.

In your statement, you said that the roadmap was lagging behind in the area of skills development programs. You say that you have had no information regarding the implementation of this focus area of the roadmap.

Is that right?

[Michel Robillard]

Yes.

To date, we have received very little information about the roadmap, the criteria, the programs, and so on. Given the expertise we have acquired and the partnerships we have established with the provinces and territories, we could use the roadmap to build innovations in literacy and basic education for Canada's official language minority communities.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

We are now in the month of May. However, in the field of education, preparations normally need to be made in advance. Those in charge have to know whether a program will be in place or not and whether funds will be available.

We began our consideration of the roadmap in early 2012, but it was only in 2013, if not later, that we obtained a positive response. The government bragged about the $1.2 billion in the media. It claimed that it made no cuts to the roadmap, even though $130 million from Immigration Canada was transferred to it.

However, your comments are in line with those from the communities, which are increasingly wondering what has happened to the roadmap. I think it must have gone to the United States. In any case, it is not on the same path as Canada. This program's role is to foster communities, to help them grow.

Now that we are conducting a study on immersion and similar considerations, we are starting to hear from communities that they have not received any money, that the situation is lacking clarity, that they no longer know where they are headed. In principle, roadmap funding should be available. I would really like to know how this situation will affect you and how you will manage to do without this government support. The government bragged all last year that it has never cut the roadmap's budget. It stated that this was the only program where no cuts were made. However, what we have been hearing makes it seem like no money has been provided through this program.

[Michel Robillard]

I will let Mr. Lévesque answer.

[Normand Lévesque, Director General, Réseau pour le développement de l'alphabétisme et des compétences]

Thank you for the question.

I have two comments about the roadmap.

The interesting thing is that the roadmap includes a component on skills for employment. However, as you pointed out, we have had no information about this for a year. That jeopardizes organizations that have developed expertise on skills and employment. Expertise on skills for employment and the labour market is difficult to develop for minority and majority communities, although we are now discussing minority communities.

The funding set out in the roadmap has still not been distributed, but what is even worse is that no mechanism has been announced so far. After a year, we are starting to think there is a problem. We are talking about the roadmap, but we could also talk about a skills development program for which we submitted a funding application at least a year ago. And we are not alone. About 30 organizations across the country are in the same situation. Those lags jeopardized organizations that represent official language minority communities and the expertise acquired. In addition, the provision of programs has been slowed down.

Skills development, both for minority and majority communities, is done in conjunction with the provinces. Slowdowns for organizations result in slowdowns in terms of relationships and the implementation of programs adapted to and in line with provincial programs. Skills development cannot be done any which way. At least, if that were the case, it would be dangerous. It would jeopardize our organizations.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I would like to now hear Mr. Morrow's take on this issue.

I am happy to see you again, Mr. Morrow.

This government was not just elected, so it doesn't have to consider everything from the ground up. Those were excuses they used in 2012. At that time, the government was saying that it was examining everything to align itself correctly and produce a roadmap to help organizations. Do you feel that this assistance is being provided to you or do you feel simply forgotten?

Making random announcements on programs in the media without doing anything on the ground will certainly lead to a balanced budget and a paid off debt.

Are you receiving any of that money? Do you have the impression that the money is available?

[Justin Morrow]

I assume that the money is available, but we have not yet received it. Apparently, this is the normal process.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

It's not there if you have not received it.

Have you received it?

[Justin Morrow]

Not really. We have not received much. We received some funding last year, but....

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I would like a clear answer. Answering with a “not really” doesn't work. When I go to the bank, I don't want them to tell me that my pay has not really been deposited. I want to know whether it has been deposited or not.

Have you received the money?

[Justin Morrow]

We have not yet received the money this year.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Thank you. That's what I wanted to know.

I assume this situation affects your organization.

[Justin Morrow]

Yes, it does.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

The same thing must be happening in New Brunswick. Is this situation affecting the organization in New Brunswick?

[Christie Dennison, Vice-President of the Board, Canadian Youth for French]

Of course. Just like Justin Morrow, I represent Canadian Youth for French. We can confirm that we have not received our funding or the contribution agreement for this year. We are in talks right now. Even though we are told that the funding is coming, we have received nothing yet. Yes, that slows down—

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

If it is coming by train, the railway tracks are being removed in New Brunswick, so you will not receive it.

What discussions have you had? Were you told when you were going to receive the money?

[Christie Dennison]

No, not as far as I know.

That has actually slowed down our activities a great deal.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

So the situation is affecting your organization.